Nikon D7200 vs D7100

Some of our readers might be interested in seeing how the newly announced Nikon D7200 compares to its predecessor, the D7100 in terms of features and specifications. With a faster processor, improved AF system, much larger buffer, Wi-Fi and a few other tweaks, the D7200 is currently Nikon’s best DX camera for capturing fast action such as sports and wildlife photography. Although the D7100 is still an amazing camera, many found its buffer to be underwhelming for continuous shooting, as it sported a fairly small buffer that accommodated even less images than the first generation Nikon D7000. In this comparison, I will first go into specifications, then talk about specific features that differentiate the two cameras. Please keep in mind that this comparison is purely based on specifications. Further details, our impressions, ISO comparisons and other useful information will be provided in our upcoming Nikon D7200 Review later this year.

First, let’s go over the bare specifications:

Nikon D7200 vs D7100 Specification Comparison

Camera Feature

Nikon D7200

Nikon D7100

Sensor Resolution

24.2 Million

24.1 Million

Sensor Type

CMOS

CMOS

Sensor Size

23.5×15.6mm

23.5×15.6mm

Sensor Pixel Size

3.92µ

3.92µ

Low Pass Filter

No

No

Sensor Dust Reduction

Yes

Yes

Image Size

6,000 x 4,000

6,000 x 4,000

Image Processor

EXPEED 4

EXPEED 3

Viewfinder Type

Pentaprism

Pentaprism

Viewfinder Coverage

100%

100%

Built-in Flash

Yes, with flash commander mode

Yes, with flash commander mode

Storage Media

2x SD

2x SD

Continuous Shooting Speed

6 FPS, 7 FPS in 1.3x Crop Mode

6 FPS, 7 FPS in 1.3x Crop Mode

Buffer Size (RAW, Lossless 14-bit)

18

6

Buffer Size (RAW, Compressed 12-bit)

35

9

Max Shutter Speed

1/8000 to 30 sec

1/8000 to 30 sec

Shutter Durability

150,000 cycles

150,000 cycles

Exposure Metering Sensor

2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II

2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II

Base ISO

ISO 100

ISO 100

Native ISO Sensitivity

ISO 100-25,600

ISO 100-6,400

Boosted ISO Sensitivity

ISO 51,200-102,400 (B&W only)

ISO 12,800-25,600

Autofocus System

Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX

Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX

Focus Points

51, 15 cross-type

51, 15 cross-type

AF Detection

Up to f/8

Up to f/8

Group Area AF

No

No

Separate Horiz and Vert Focus Point Adjustments

Yes

No

AF Detection Range

-3 to +19 EV

-2 to +19 EV

Exposure Bracketing

9 frames in steps of 1/3 or 1/2 EV

2 to 5 frames in steps of 1/3, 1/2, 2/3, 1, 2, or 3 EV

Video Output

MOV, H.264/MPEG-4

MOV, H.264/MPEG-4

Video Maximum Resolution

1920×1080 (1080p) up to 60p

1920×1080 (1080p) up to 60i

Flat Picture Control

Yes

No

Clarity Control Adjustment

Yes

No

Picture Control Adjustments

0.25 step adjustment

1 step adjustment

Manual White Balance Presets

1-6

1-3

Number of intervals in Time-lapse

Up to 9,999

Up to 999

Audio Recording

Built-in microphone External stereo microphone (optional)

Built-in microphone External stereo microphone (optional)

LCD Size

3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD

3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD

LCD Resolution

1,228,800 dots

1,228,800 dots

Built-in GPS

No

No

Wi-Fi Functionality

Built-in, with NFC

Eye-Fi Compatible, WU-1a

Battery

EN-EL15 Lithium-ion Battery

EN-EL15 Lithium-ion Battery

Battery Life

1,110 shots (CIPA)

950 shots (CIPA)

Battery Charger

MH-25a Quick Charger

MH-25 Quick Charger

Weather Sealed Body

Yes

Yes

USB Version

2.0

2.0

Weight (Body Only)

675g

675g

Dimensions

135.5 × 106.5 × 76mm

135.5 x 106.5 x 76mm

MSRP Price

$1,199 (as introduced)

$1,199 (as introduced)

Nikon did not make any changes to the exterior of the D7200, so it is essentially identical to its predecessor. So whether you are looking at the front, top or back of the camera, button and control layout, ergonomics and the overall look are the same. Both dimensions and weight are also the same.

What has changed is the internals of the camera. First, the sensor on the D7200 is slightly different. Judging by the megapixel count, it looks like Nikon is most likely using the same Sony-made sensor on the D7200 as on the D5500, whereas the D7100 had a sensor made by Toshiba. Nikon increased the native sensitivity of the sensor on the D7200 by two stops from 100-6400 to 100-25600, but it is doubtful that the D7200 will offer drastic improvements in noise performance beyond ISO 6400, so it is most likely just a marketing gimmick. I also find it entertaining that Nikon offered “boost” ISO sensitivities of 51,200 and 102,400 in black and white…

The highlight of the Nikon D7200 is the much bigger buffer – the Nikon D7200 can shoot up to 18 images in 14-bit lossless RAW, which is roughly 3 times more than what the D7100 can do. The D7100 only lasted for a mere second before the buffer filled up and the camera slowed down and the D7200 will triple that time. So if you shoot any sort of fast action (like sports and wildlife), the D7200 will be a much better choice, because it will allow you to shoot much longer in continuous bursts.

Two big differences are in the autofocus department. First, the Nikon D7200 has an improved 51-point AF system that can go all the way down to -3 in detection range. This means that the D7200 should be easier to focus with in low-light situations and it should perform quite well when using f/4 and slower lenses with teleconverters. Second, the D7200 comes with the latest EXPEED 4 processor, which is roughly 30% faster than the previous generation EXPEED 3 processor on the D7100. That 30% increase in speed also translates to autofocus speed improvements, particularly when tracking subjects.

The Nikon D7200 also comes with built-in Wi-Fi capabilities, allowing the camera to be controlled remotely and allowing for image transfer between the camera and other devices. Speaking of which, the D7200 is the first Nikon DSLR to be shipped with NFC (Near Field Communication), which allows for seamless connectivity with smart devices – a neat and useful feature.

Battery life has been improved, most likely thanks to the faster and perhaps more power efficient processor, allowing for 1,110 shots on a single charge (per CIPA). Video shooters should be more pleased with the 60p HD recording mode and flat picture control. There are a few other small firmware tweaks here and there (like 9 frame exposure bracketing), but they are not anything major.

Looks like the Nikon D7200 is a pretty solid camera with a few notable improvements. But the biggest question is, would it make sense to upgrade from the D7100? If you shoot sports and wildlife, the D7200’s buffer, -3 EV sensitivity and faster processor are worth moving up to in my opinion. However, for all other purposes, I would stick with the D7100 and skip the upgrade – the D7100 is still an amazing camera. If you currently use an entry-level DSLR, the D7000 or other previous-generation cameras, the Nikon D7200 is definitely worth upgrading to. If you have a lower-end camera and have budget limitations, it is a good time now to check out the second hand market – there will probably be lots of D7100 DSLRs for sale at great prices.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

If you enjoyed reading this article, please consider subscribing to our email newsletter to receive biweekly emails notifying you of the latest articles posted on the website. Email Address First Name

By checking this box I consent to the use of my information, as detailed in the Privacy Policy.

Related articles:

About Nasim Mansurov

Nasim Mansurov is the author and founder of Photography Life, based out of Denver, Colorado. He is recognized as one of the leading educators in the photography industry, conducting workshops, producing educational videos and frequently writing content for Photography Life. You can follow him on Instagram, 500px and Facebook. Read more about Nasim here.

Reader Interactions

Comments

1) Richard Walliker

March 4, 2015 at 7:05 am

Thanks for your initial thoughts Nasim. I take wildlife with the D7100. Yes, the RAW buffering is annoying, however I’ve leaned to live with it. I am bitterly disappointed that this launch wasn’t the “D400” or whatever an upgraded semi pro DX dSLR may be called. I’m having trouble understanding Nikon’s logic as Canon have produced an excellent upgrade to the 7D indicating there’s an appetite in the market for a semi pro DX, however Nikon seem to be blind to it. If and when it arrives, Nikon can blame only themselves for low sales as Canon will almost have cornered the new user market for this type of camera and by then and many loyal Nikon users will have jumped ship too!

Richard, I understand your frustration and I feel exactly the same way. There is still hope – perhaps this summer for the D400. Nikon said they will release a competitor to the 7D Mark II, so it will probably happen sooner than later.

I bought the 18-140mm as I dropped and broke my older 18-70mm which I had liked a lot. I have had nothing but good results with it and my D7100. I also use the Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 80-400mm f.4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens and it gives good results too. Like Richard Walliker, I too have learned to live with the differences. If I could post a photo I could show you my results but haven’t figured that out yet. Of course now the D7500 is out, but the fact that it has only one card slot (Really!) and can’t be used with manual focus lenses (I have 5.) is a deal breaker.

I Want to buy a dx camera for the ”extra reach”! I know only fov change but with dx you also get increase pixel density. I have a D810 and want to buy my last lense a big telephoto. I am hesitating between the 400mm and 600mm. I really don’t know what to do! I would prefer the 400mm because it is better optically, sharper(dxomark rated it almost as twice as sharp as the 600mm, less ca). The 400mm is also able to focus closer too and Would be really good for wildlife. I could use the 400mm with dx for a 600mm fov and put the 1.4 tc when extra reach is needed. For the most versatility, do you think I should go with the 400mm lense and use it with a dx and fx body? The advantage is that I won’t use anything bigger then a 1.4 tc keepong quality at is best.

Let me know if that would be a wise Decision Nasim! I know you are sold on fx but the 600mm would be more limiting to me! I also have the 200mm f2 vr which I am using right now with the tc-20eII but 400mm is too short for birding.

Eric, I am still working on the 400mm f/2.8E review, but if you are deciding between that lens and the 600mm f/4G, it is a no-brainer – go for the 400mm. With teleconverters, you have a more versatile and lighter setup. The 400mm goes well with all three teleconverters…I had a hard time returning it!

If I were you, I would stick with the 810 and buy a 500mm instead of the lenses you mentioned. 500mm is lighter than the 400mm and less expensive. Still it is an awesome lens for wildlife and would compliment your 810 capabilities excellently. 500mm on a dx crop, or 1.3 crop, of the 810 would give you amazing results. I have the 810 and 7100 and the AFS 80-400VR. With this lens, I prefer to use the 7100 for small birds. Still, for closer or larger birds I prefer the 810. With the 500mm attached to it, you could use only one camera body, switch lenses, and you have a fantastic camera also for landscape and portraits… You can see samples of my birds images using both cameras here, if you like:www.pbase.com/acume…only_birds

P.S. Thanks Nasim for this preliminary review of the 7200. I am addicted to your reports. Please keep on with this excellent work.

Awesome photos! Do you shoot in the ‘S mode’ for the bird shots? I’ve saved a lot of money after following the ‘angry photographer on youtube. He has great tips on which lenses are the sharpest and why.

Eric, I would have to agree with Nasim here. I have both the 500mm f/4 and the 600mm f/4. Recently a friend dropped by to show me his new 400mm f2.8e. Not sure where he got it but I wouldn’t let him leave without loaning it to me for a couple of days. I tested this lens with all three of Nikons TC’s and with the 2xTC at f/8 I found the 400 much sharper than the 600mm alone or with 1.4 TC. It was also an easier rig to handle.

Thanks for your comments thus far on the D7200. I had a feeling in the middle of last year that the D7200 was imminent, but as per Nikon, they would not give me a release date,so I bought the D7100 in September and have had 6 months of care-free photography. With your comparison and comments I won’t upgrade to the D7200 even though I do shoot wild life, but not all the time, and there are ways around the small buffer, but of course with some quality loss. If we keep waiting for the prefect camera, we would never do any photography at all.

Leo, you are absolutely right! Like I said, the D7100 is an amazing camera and not worth upgrading for most photographers out there. It is best to wait another two years and see if the D7300 will be worth looking at. As always, I recommend skipping at least one generation before looking into upgrade options.

Thank you Nasim for this comparison. I had a D7100 but then sold it and now happy with a D300s, just because of the ergonomics. I thought I would upgrade to the next best DX when it’s announced but finally it won’t be the case. The D7100 is uncomfortably small in my hand and it feels like I can drop it anytime, can’t be relaxing enough to take good photos. So I think I’ll skip D7200 and keep waiting while the D300s still serves me well.

As I don’t often shoot wild life or fast sports I don’t see any reason to switch right now. Perhaps if, Nikon actually comes out with a pro DX, I might make the change up. As Richard Walliker, states, the buffering can be annoying but there are ways to get around that, albeit at some loss of IQ. I quite often shoot street events with the D7100’s but recently have taken to doing these with the D750. Having three iterations of Nikon cameras, D7100, D750 and D800e, I don’t see any reason to make any changes. Were I a sports photographer, pro or amateur, I would just have opted for the D4s. As for my wild life photography which I am still learning to do and quite frankly so far I suck at, I took the advice of John Sherman and others to study the animals first and learn their habits. This has helped me anticipate what they are going to do and get better captures. Personally I like birds in trees or feeder more than birds in flight. LOL From what Nasim has posted here, the D7200 is not enough of an upgrade for me to get overly thrilled about. It will be interesting to read the rest of the comments.

Mike, I upgraded from the D7000 to the D750 and couldn’t be happier. I do a lot of bird photography and I find the AF on the D750 better, color and contrast, more detail and the processor is faster. The buffer is OK shooting in RAW in short bursts, which works fine for me. I also really like FX vs. DX. I know DX has it’s place in wildlife photography but I feel I’m getting more detail with full frame. I’m also getting more captures of birds in flight with the D750 than I did with the D7000, I think because of the improved AF. One of the big reasons I switched was the low light capabilities of the D750 compared to the D7000. With the D7000 anything above 800 ISO was unusable, even with post editing. I haven’t tried the D7100, but neither the D7100 or D7200 interest after using my D750.

Cindy, since acquiring my D750’s I have not used the D7100’s much at all. In fact, I haven’t used my D800e’s either. I had three D7100 and sold one several months ago and am trying to sell another. I will keep one for back up or dedicate it to IR, not sure yet. Although after 50 years in photography, I’m just learning wildlife photography. Like you, I find short bursts fine for capturing birds in flight which I’m still not good at. Above, Gustavo, mentions that the buffer in the D7100 pissed him off several times. I feel his pain but learned to do shorter bursts with the D750 and that buffer clears with fast SD cards very well. I don’t try to hand hold large lenses and am usually mounted on a tripod with gimbal head or monopod with gimbal so follow focus is a little easier for me. Just not as strong as I used to be. The quality of the images from the D750 certainly, for the most part, outshine the D7100 but I earned a lot of money with the D7100 and have no complaints with that camera. With the D750, I’ve done shots at 9000 ISO with little post processing for the images I needed. If an image is going on the web then I’m sure 12,500 would be fine also from the D750. I understand the comment that at some ISO images can become bothersome. As a journalist there is almost not such think. Only the picture is important and when you have to make the shot you make it and live with the grain or noise. However, I understand in art photography that can be annoying.

Mike, I also use a monopod with my 300 f/4 with a 1.4 TC, which works well for me. I get more in focus shots that way. That’s not even a heavy lens compared to others, but I’m getting older and also am not as strong as I used to be. I recently got the new 300 f/4 with VR and it’s half the weight of it’s predecessor AND has VR, and optically is even a bit better than the previous version, which I thought was fantastic even with the TC. Even with this lighter lens I use a monopod because I have more success. I’ve been wanting to try a gimbal head for smoother panning and focus. I’m also going to try a 1.7 TC or a 2x TC on my new 300mm, hoping AF will still be fast enough and get me out there a little further. It’s a lot of fun! The highest ISO I shoot at with the D750 is 6400, usually 3200, and find the images still good after post editing. I love this camera. Someday I’d like to try a D810 for landscape and architecture, but for now I’m very happy. Happy birding!

Cindy, with the lens and rig you are using you may only need a sidewinder gimbal attachment to a good ball head or monopod head. A full gimbal of quality is expensive and the side mounted attachment will work for the 300mm, camera and TC. Plus, it will be easier to use in the field and a lot less expensive. I often use my ProMediaGear Tomahawk side mounted gimbal to my monopod head. It’s enough even for the Sigma 50-500 and either the Nikon 500mm or 600mm. Now this is when I don’t need to set up with a tripod. For the really big glass I much prefer the tripod mount with full gimbal. The occasion I had to push the 750 to 9000 ISO was a Christmas service I did for a local church. Silent Night was the last song and everyone held lit candles as the lights went out. Virtually no noise in the file at all and it was only posted on their website anyway. I will shoot indoors at 6000 anytime I need to with the D750.

I think any of the quality sidewinder gimbal are good. When it comes to full gimbal then a careful decision needs to be made. I use the ProMediaGear Tomahawk. It is big but very stable and smooth and I’m sure as expensive as the Wimberley or any of the quality units. Jobo makes a couple also that are a little less expensive. But just remember what it has to hold and what it would cost to replace if the gimbal fails.

D750 low light capabilities and AF is very tempting. I had a kit D7000 + 300 f/4 + TC 1.4. I shoot mostly wildlife (birds too) and feel like its time to upgrade. ISO and AF “update” with D750 would be significantly, but how about reach? Or are you using TC 1.7 now combined with 300 f/4 or other lens? Only bigger ISO and AF will not really solved my needs (it is of course a BIG plus), but I need at least 600mm. So if going with D750 – probably will need to upgrade to other lens. The option could be Sigma 150-600 sport. Another option is the same setup, just change the camera to D7200. But from your and other posts it seems D750 is a way much better camera for wildlife than D7200. Will appreciate any comments. Best wishes :)

ikasas, the two main features I can see with the D7200 is the bigger buffer system and the new sensor. Last week I had an event assignment in Myrtle Beach, SC and when it was done I took some time to see one of the parks my client told me about. I was shooting that day with the D750, Nikon 70-200 f2.8, Nikon 105 f2.8 Micro Nikkor, and Tokina 16-28 f2.8. I had not considered trying the DX drop down yet so I played around with it several times. Of course we lose MP with using the cropped attributes but I didn’t have in mind making large prints just wanted to experiment with the images. The D750 offers FX, 1.2crop, and 1.5crop. I used all settings and got some interesting results. Just remember, when shooting DX with FX lenses all you are changing is the FOV. If you really want to magnify the image you would need longer lenses to do that. The D7200 would give you a FOV of approx. 765mm using the 300mm plus 1.7TC at 1.5crop sensor. That seems to me to be a very had hold able combination. Plus you most likely will not lose the AF speed with that set up. Furthermore, for your purpose, you get the full 24MP of the D7200. Just a thought.

The bigger buffer system in the D7200 is a big plus. With the D750 I have to shoot in short bursts as after about 6 shots it bogs down, shooting in RAW. That works for me, it might not work for you. If you’re just shooting wildlife then perhaps the D7200 would be best. I’m shooting wildlife as well as landscape and architecture, interiors, etc. and for me the D750 is a much better all around camera, and I still prefer it for wildlife. The AF system is amazing. I’m still using the 300mm f/4 for wildlife, though now have the new one with VR. Great lens, though in some situations the bokeh is not quite as good as the older version. However, it seems a bit sharper, which I didn’t think was possible. I use a 1.4 TC and just got a 1.7 TC to try. In the few shots I took this weekend it seemed to make the AF hunt around a bit so it was slower. The 1.4 on my 300mm still gives me very fast focus. I haven’t tried the Sigma 150-600.

Cindy, thanks for response. Bigger buffer is always good, but it could not win for me against better AF, better high ISO handling. I almost do shoot in bursts (it was quite enough on D7000). I am patiently waiting for a shot and then taking it. Mostly taking pictures of nature (or course using camera during travels, but both would be great for that i suppose). And for birds I need reach. Heh, it seems no easy solution will be for me. The less expensive one is to update camera from D7000 to D7200 and how Mike is telling maybe try to use TC 1.7. On the other hand still thinking about D750 + Sigma 150-600 sport, but will wait for the review of this Sigma on PL.

Cindy, I noticed above your comment regarding interiors. I’m thinking you might, like me, shoot real estate. In any event here is a situation I found myself in a week or so ago. I was sent to photography a big home up in Virginia’s horse country. This was about an hour and a half ride from Richmond. When I arrived at the house I first mounted my camera on tripod and started shooting the exterior. Going inside and moving equipment for the interiors, I discovered I left all my strobes back at the studio. I had the stands, modifiers, reflectors, the whole nine yards but no lights. DUH!!!! Fortunately for me, the house was very light and airy. I pumped the ISO on the D750 to around 5000 and just tried my best. GREAT RESULTS! I am thinking if the home was an older built residence I would not have been able to do this but with all the windows and a great amount of daylight coming if the reflectors and high ISO did the trick. BTW, this was also the first time I shot this kind of assignment with the D750. Usually I use my D800e’s for real estate.

Way to go Mike! Isn’t the D750 amazing?! I was in Santa Barbara a couple of weekends ago and visited the courthouse, which is a beautiful, old building with amazing tile work and construction inside and out. I just got the Nikon 16-35mm lens and used it on the D750 without flash and low ISO on the interiors just to see how they would do, hand held, very slow shutter speeds, and got great results! Of course this combo was great on the exteriors as well. I’d like to do more work like this. It’s technically interesting, but more than that I like the angles and textures and how light interacts with that, and some buildings are just plain gorgeous.

I vacillated for some time between the D750 and upgrading to the D810. I have and use the D800e so I didn’t feel that would be an advantage for me. There seems to be no end to discovering what the D750 will do. I am thinking that even though it is not considered a pro body this model will be around for a long time. Only thing I believe they could up grade would be the buffer. I don’t even care about a front curtain shutter.

Cindy, recently I purchased the Tokina 16-28 f2.8. I really wanted the Nikon 16-35 f4 as it offers more versatility but needed the faster lens for my real estate work. It is replacing the 11-16 f2.8 Tokina I used on my D7100. However, because the D750 is so good in low light high ISO situations, when it comes to the lower end homes I shoot for my broker I can get in and out much faster without setting several strobes to light the rooms. On the higher end home I have to take much more time with my images and I am paid for the time. As I wrote above to Iksas, I was contemplating pulling the trigger on the new 400mm f2.8E. But I’m thinking if I bring a $13,000 lens into the house my wife will really make me keep the appointments with that psychiatrist. She’ll also probably make me buy something expensive for all three of her kids. So maybe the 16-35 f4 is more in my future. I did have a chance to borrow one and use it for street photography one weekend and really liked the images I was able to produce with it on the D750.

Mike, I looked at a Tokina 17-35 f/4 and it seemed like a nice lens, with minimal distortion at the wide end. I never considered the 2.8 lens Tokina, thinking f/4 would be fast enough for me. I also wanted the VR that the Nikon 16-35mm offers for hand holding, and thought at the time I would mostly use it for landscapes and architecture, so outdoors, and I would need f/2.8 much. I may regret it, but so far I’m very happy with my choice. I’ve drooled over the 400mm f/2.8E, but I would really like to retire in the next 7-10 years, and I’m quite fond of my husband and don’t want him to leave. He would never suggest therapy–he’s lost all hope when it comes to me and photography and gear. For now I’ll have to make do with my light, sharp 300mm f/4 VR with the 1.4 TC, and maybe the 1.7 TC (if that works out). Sigh…. :-)

Cindy, I’m thinking shooting with the D750, f4 is fast enough. Of course those who promote big bokeh think f.9 isn’t wide enough. I also looked at the Tokina 17-35 f4 at the same time I looked at the Sigma 17-50. I ordered both and made my testes with them and opted for the Sigma for its wider range of focal lengths for my D7100. The Tokina I tested on the D800 also and in my field tests I found the Sigma to be a bit better in color rendition although both were equally contrasty for me and my usage. I really needed something for the D7100 at the time and the Sigma made better sense.

5.1.2.1.1.2.2) Cindy Leeson

April 9, 2015 at 10:00 am

Mike, I missed in your comment the first read through that you thought I might shoot real estate–I don’t. I’m learning how to shoot architecture and interiors. Sounds like we live on opposite coasts. Too bad ’cause it would be great to hire you for a lesson or two, or three!

Cindy, I got that you live on the West coast from one of your threads. Well, I have a good friend out in San Francisco and am planning on visiting in the next several months. As for lessons, I don’t charge friends more than dinner. LOL

Mike, enjoy San Francisco, a beautiful city and wonderful photography destination. I live about 2 hours from San Francisco but am more of a country mouse than a city mouse. Our niece is visiting San Francisco from Chicago in a couple of months and we’re going to venture out to meet her there. So maybe if we’re in town at the same time I can buy you that dinner!

Cindy, this won’t happen for a while. Right now we are house hunting. My wife has been hired as the new provost and vice president of academic affairs at Longwood University in Farmville, VA. This is about an hour’s drive from Richmond so we are going back and forth looking at properties. Then there will be selling our home in Richmond and the move. I’m thinking and hoping it will be in the spring but two hours isn’t that far from San Francisco for us to hook up and you can show me some of the sights.

) Cindy Leeson

April 13, 2015 at 8:30 am

Mike, good luck with your house hunting and move, and congrats to your wife on her new job! When you have time to get away to San Francisco maybe we can connect.

) Mike Banks

April 13, 2015 at 9:30 am

Cindy, although with the move and new job, I’m not sure when that will happen unless I get an assignment out there. But you can count on my contacting you somehow when that trip happens. BTW, we found a house. Now it is just a matter of an end price.

5.1.2.1.2) iksas

April 9, 2015 at 3:08 am

Mike, thanks for response.

D7200: 300mm /f4 + TC 1.7 could be interesting try. Nice reach 765mm against now 630, but it would be f/6.8. That means bigger ISO. Maybe D7200 handles them quite well? Need to wait for detailed review on PL. Another question how about AF: would it hunt a lot or just sometimes in bad light? One more thing to consider.

I own Sigma 150-500 too. Not happy with the results. It seems new Sigma 150-600 sport is a way better. But probably not a solution to use on DX body, because for the best results you would need stop down. As a result it would be f/7.1 with 900mm, meanwhile with kit mentioned by you would be 765mm with f/6.8.

D750: Sigma 150-600, would still give you only 600 with f/7.1 (stopped down for the best sharpness) and better ISO and AF capabilities. 300 f/4 + TC 1.7 would give only 510mm with f/5.6 and 600mm f/8 with TC 2.0.

Conclusions: Obviously that if buying D750 then buying new lens (probably sigma 150-600 sport). Comparing with the kit now loosing: 1) a little reach 2) probably some sharpness 3) weight – kit becomes much heavier; winning: 1) AF 2) ISO 3) buffer (i did not check, but i think its better on D750 than on D7000).

Upgrading to D7200 + Sigma 150-600 sport wining as mentioned above + reach; loosing: 1) probably some sharpness 2) half a stop (could be compensated by a little better low light ISO handling comparing with D7000, with which I try do not use bigger ISO than 640)

No easy solution… Will wait for sigma 150-600 sport review on PL. Well, I think at least the camera need to be upgraded – wining everywhere with that. Wildlife and birds photography for now its just a hobby and pleasure being in nature :)

Iksas, I think you are weighing all your options very well as it seems you are much more into wildlife then I. Quite frankly, I suck at birds in flight and mainly shoot birds on the ground, in the lake, or in trees. LOL I’ve not really had a problem with the buffer on the D750 jamming up as, like Cindy, I shoot in burst when attempting BIF but have been able to get 8-10 frames before the buffer takes a moment to catch up. I also don’t think you will have a problem with the D7200 hunting as the AF seems to be as good as, if not better, than the D7100 or the D750 and I believe better than the D7000, which is still one great camera. AF with the D750 is truly great and I am constantly amazed at how quickly it acquires focus in every mode. With the new sensor technology in either the D7200 or D750 high ISO should not be a problem. On several assignments recently I had to shoot as high as 12,800 and still got clean files for use on websites. Printing photos would be a different situation and more post processing I think. Haven’t done that yet so I don’t know for sure. (It’s on my list for experimentation.) One limiting factor with the D750 is the 4000 max shutter speed. This has been a real PITA on several occasions and caused me to use either a polarizing filter for one stop advantage or CND filter in other situations. Iksas, as for the lenses, I think when all is said and done, and all the testing is in, we are going to find less difference between the Sigma and the Tamron then we think. Big advantage to the Sigma Sport is the weather sealing but I always have Lens Coats for all my important lenses anyway so I don’t really worry about that. Plus, personally, I’m not inclined to really get out in severe inclement weather at my age. I agree with your last statement, there is no easy solution and when deciding to spend good money one never wants to make a mistake or jump into something without enough information. Even though I’ve seen some very nice results from the Tamron 150-600, I’m still awaiting Nasim’s evaluation for all these lenses. It would be easy for me to jump in and get the Nikon 300mm or the 400mm and use TC’s but since wildlife is not my earned income, either the Tamron or Sigma looks to me to be a good buying decision.

Mike, Once I needed telephoto lens for my vacations, and had only a week to decide. It was 3 years ago, so were was no tamron or sigma 150-600 (one of them probably would be choosen), so Sigma 150-500 was choosed. As it was only the second step to the telephotos (before I used only 70-300 VR), that time looked like Sigma was a good deal. I understood its limitations – use it only in good light. But after some time realized that i need better IQ. So Nikkor 300 f/4 + TC 1.4 (after reading Nasim review) was purchased and still being in use. Love the kit! Only one thing bothers – need more reach. So now I am trying to weight all options and find best solution which fits for me. Like you I could buy 300 or 400 too, but could never justify spending such amount of money on it. Its my hobby. Going for nature/birds hunt only on my free time, which is limited. So what to buy a lens or quite good BMW? LOL.

I suck taking birds in flight too. Just have couple of shots with big birds, like white stork, great heron which could be usable. Mostly shooting “posing” birds, like on the trees, lakes, ground, snow and etc. And here if you are not so far away, even with this kit, can produce really nice pictures. And I have more than just a couple i really love. Of course its not like from the review of this beast photographylife.com/revie…m-f2-8e-vr, but images about which I am satisfied.

I was almost decided to upgrade my camera to D7200, but after reading yours and Cindy comments on how amazing D750 is, changing my mind for D750.

Anyway, but i think i will not buy anything until full reviews of Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 150-600 sport will be available on PL. And probably you are right, saying that it could be just a little difference. And when it will be a hard decision too: what to choose less cost, availability to hand held Tamron or more expensive, more weighing, but producing better IQ? So lets wait and see :)

Iksas, About 10 months ago, I was working my butt off and invoiced a great deal of income. In a fit of craziness I ordered and purchased both the Nikon 500 f4 and the Nikon 600 f4. Since my wife and I don’t share our income except for house hold expenses and vacations etc., she didn’t say anything when she saw the invoice for these two lenses. She did however call for an appointment with one of the local psychiatrists because she thought I went nuts. Although she is not into photography, she does understand that 75% of my work from which 95% of my income is derived is in macro. What was I going to do with these two table legs I just bought? Several outings and many conversations later, I decided once the first reviews for the Tamron came out and looked pretty good, I would sell both these lenses to a friend photographer here in town. He paid me full price since I had only used them each on two occasions. Ok, they are gone. I do have both the 80-400D and 80-400G which I like for different reasons and I shoot a lot with the Sigma 50-500 but she is aging and needs to be replaced. Like you, I don’t want to jump into a decision regarding either models of the two Sigma or the Tamron until I see more information coming from Nasim or some of the other team members. Just not convinced yet which to get even though I was able to hold the Tamron recently and got a chance to see what it can do. Currently, I am taking a long hard look at the new Nikon 400 f2.8E. I did read the review you pointed to when it first came out and again a few minutes ago. It really looks like a very good winner and very versatile lens on either DX or FX cameras and I have both. Plus, it seems to preform well with any of the TC’s. I may go ahead and just get the 400 as my birthday is coming up and I have to decide upon a present for myself. Probably will obtain a Sherpa to go along with it to carry it around. LOL BTW, I opted for a Honda Pilot since it has a tremendous cargo capacity, but alas no heated steering wheel.

Mike, Nice story. If your birthday is coming – go for 400 f/2.8E (make a plan to convince your wife :). It will cost you money, but is definitely a winner comparing with Tamron or Sigma. You will have a beast and will love working with it – I am sure :). Anyway, lets patiently wait for the Sigma review too. P.S. I went for a BMW :)

iksas, affordable or not I don’t think the 400 f2.8 is anywhere in my near future. Long focus lenses are more in the genre of hobby for me than income producing equipment. Even though I believe what you and Nasim write that it is a phenomenal lens.Just this Saturday, I purchased the Nikon 16-35 f4 from another photographer who found the Tokina 16-28 f2.8 more useful in her work with children’s portraits. Now I have both the Nikon 16-35 f4 and the Tokina 16-28 f2.8 which I just purchased. Like you, I am going to wait for more of Nasim’s reviews on the two Sigma and Tamron 150-600 in order to make my decision. Of course, I do already believe that with its weather sealed body and beefier construction I’ll most like go for the Sigma Sport unless it just doesn’t make sense regarding IQ and weight.

6) Vineet

March 4, 2015 at 7:42 am

Currently using D7000 +300+1.4TC for birding and wildlife. Was Planing to upgrade to D750 , now 7200 is here. Which is better D750 or D7200 ?

Depends. The smaller DX sensor area puts a lot more pixels on target than the D750 with the same. Which is better? Neither. They are both good cameras and will do the job. Will they make your pictures meaningfully better? Only you can say but I tend to believe, especially with birds and wildlife, that improving your technique and shot discipline will give you more reward than a body upgrade.

But if you’re wanting to upgrade to get something new, and your focus is on distant targets, get the D7200.

1. the AF module i think is new and they call it “Advanced Multi-CAM 3500DX II”

2. I am a little bit concerned by the sample images Nikon has released so far. Probably they try to demonstrate the -3EV low light focusing potential and the flat picture control mode JPG, the dynamic range of it and all, but many of the results they post so far are worryingly awful.

I’d double that. Recently I tried to do the brenizer method and.. you shoot the half of it, than it decides to not shoot for 2-3 seconds and the whole picture is ruined. Looking forward to buy those Sandisk Extreme ones, but heck they are very pricey..

Was this a typo or D7200 does not allow for 1 stop exposure bracketing? Also, am I missing something? Why do we need bracketing with exposure step less than 1? Isn’t the whole point of bracketing to extend the dynamic range of the camera? A reference or an explanation would be greatly appreciated.

Yes, you can bracket in 1EV increments. That spec is kind of out of context, and means that you can choose “overall” exposure increments for the camera of either 1/3EV or 1/2EV (using Custom Setting b2-EV Steps for Exposure Control). These increments will apply to bracketing, so if your camera is set up for 1/3EV exposure increments, you can bracket in increments of 1/3, or 2/3, or 1, or 2, or 3. And you can now bracket up to 9 frames.

Looks like the D7200 finally caught up to the Pentax K-3, except the lenses and camera are weather resistant on the Pentax. The only way Nikon will catch up with the K-3 is by coming out with the D400. Until then, I call my Pentax K-3 the D400 that never was!

Hi Nasim Thanks again for this new info. Isn’t it time you make an article discussing how to choose the level of “Quality” on our camera based on pic quality and what we intend to do with our images such as screen display or printing or else ?. Maybe choosing a level of lower quality is better than loosing shots in a sequence from an empty memory buffer. regards

I keep seeing that -3EV for AF stat showing up everywhere and I understand the implications but I don’t understand the number. What exactly does the -3EV stand for? What does 0 represent for AF? I’d emjoy reading an explanation of relevance if possible :)

As aretired Electronics Technician and familiarity the issues caused by flexible connections how easy they are to wear out how had the contacts are to get to lubricate to prevent issue and difficulty re-soldering broken flex connection and or repairing replacing Flex cables. I relieved they didn’t add the Tilt screen. Plus I am not normally to do secret agent type hidden photography and and physically unable to do so. Adorama sent me a Notice for Pre-order and I am more likely to consider doing so now and if they had but the flex screen on.

Phillip, I agree that potentially the flex screen could be a problem. When I bought the first D750 I figured I would leave the screen in place and never use it. But man, chasing my grandchildren around that feature comes in real handy. It has made my macro work easier too. Had to shoot a street event a couple of months ago and it was raining. Didn’t have a problem. Now it wasn’t pouring but the sprinkle was steady and when I was done and wiping the camera down there was no moisture behind the screen. This doesn’t mean something can’t or won’t happen in the future but we both survived that day.

Right now Sony does not make enough or the right type of lenses for my pro work. I’m glad you like your camera. I never compare equipment as better or best. Everyone has a preference. When I work with a photographers pool for a major event. I don’t see any Sony cameras. Now why do you think that might be?

What’s a fella to do? I could continue to hang onto my aging but in excellent condition D7000/MB-D11 that I paid dearly for 4 years ago, in the continued hopes Nikon will eventially produce the mystery D400. I could dump my equipment and get a good deal on a D7100 or even buy a new D7200 only to pay a premium price for yet another battery grip. I could go full frame which opens up many more possibilities.

Frank, consider from this perspective. Two main features of the new D7200 are similar to the D750. If your kit consists in mostly quality FX glass, you might want to make the big leap to FX. If, on the other hand, you have quality DX glass the D7200 or a good condition D7100 would be the better choice saving you a lot of upgrade money for lenses. Just my .02, hope this helps.

This is how I setup the D7100 to deal with the limited buffer. U1 – 14bit and all settings for maximum quality, every day shooting. U2 – 12bit and disable all high iso features, it gives me around 9FPS which is good for action

No doubt it is the best DX camera of Nikon line up. It is much better than Canon 70D. Though Really not having features of Pro DX as 7D mark II. However Please check Nikon specification where Autofocus area mode not mentioned Group area autofocus in the chart. It is clear Nikon kept something again for D400(myth).

im just starting out photography as a hobby, im intrested to shoot landscapes and street with the lens 18-35 sigma 1.8, do you think i should wait for 7200 to release in my local shops or just buy the 7100? im having trouble deciding the two…

I have been thinking about purchasing a D7100 on the cheap now that the D7200 has been announced. That is until I read several articles claiming the D7100 has banding issues. I have not seen this with my D7000 even though I take a lot of night sky photos, but then again I don’t normally push my images to the extreme in post processing like the examples I have seen. I have read that the D7000 and the D7200 have sensors made by Sony and the D7100 sensor was made by Toshiba, lending me to think there is no software fix for this. Is this even a real world issue with the D7100?

Frank, you may be mistaking the banding issues with the D750. I have never heard anyone who uses a D7100, myself included, talk about banding issues and have never seen them in any of the images I’ve taken with the D7100.

In the two years I’ve shot with the D7100’s and post to several boards including PL I’ve never heard one issue with banding for the D7100. The D750 was recalled by Nikon to fix the banding problem and I had to send all three of my D750’s back for the fix, although I never saw the issue until Nasim explained how to create it and I was able to do so. But if you both will show me links to the discussion of the banding issue with the D750 I would like to read them and will stand corrected.

Mike, unfortunately there is quite a bit of chatter on the net about this banding issue regarding the D7100. Reportedly the D5200 is effected by this anomaly as well. I guess both cameras have the same Toshiba sensor. Not having a D7100 and normally not lifting my blacks and dark greys very much in LR I haven’t experienced this issue. As I mentioned before I do take a lot of night sky photography with my D7000 and wonder if this banding issue would be a problem for me if I purchased a D7100? Anyway here is one link for you @ www.dpreview.com/forum…t/51542686

Frank, as I read through the thread you offer here, what I am seeing is noise banding from very underexposed images. This is not the banding I thought you referred to in your original post. Also, if you read through all the comments, several other posters agree with me that this kind of banding will appear when one shoots to the left and not the right. Although shooting to the right will sometimes lose detail in highlights one would not have seen the extreme examples offered from the original OP. In any event, the banding I thought you were talking about was the top bands which were occurring in the D750 and not the D7100, due to improper alignment of the sensor in the sensor box. So I misunderstood your comment. Having said all that, I shot with the D7100’s professionally for two years, (as well as the D800e) and never saw extreme examples as displayed in the thread you directed me too. I think you need to read through the entire thread and you will have more information regarding this kind of banding. I’m sure you will understand all points of view from the example you have here. Also, I will say, I never liked to push the D7100 over 1200 ISO and that is why I bought the D800e’s. Now, with the D750’s I almost never use the D800e at all. I just misunderstood your inference to “banding”.

Thanks Mike, but I am still unsure if the D7100 has a “real world” issue with this type of banding. I would like to think it doesn’t. As I have indicated I normally don’t push my images in LR to the degree that produces this issue. Maybe I will wait a few months and see if any first run production issues crop up with the D7200. I do want to upgrade my D7000 at some point, but I can wait until I am confident with my next purchase.

Frank, you sound like a very sensible person to me and I’m sure whatever you decide will be the best way to go for yourself. Not wanting to be redundant here but I will state that beside PL, I also read and post to Nikonians and Fredmiranda and I have never seen one thread regarding this issue with the D7100. However, having said that, if you are just upgrading, I think the decision to go with the D7200 would be wise unless money is a major factor, as the D7100’s can be had very cheaply right now. With a better, bigger buffer and advanced sensor the D7200 would be a good choice.

If you don’t shoot a lot of high DR scenes and you don’t push shadows more than 2 or 3 stops, you probably won’t notice the banding. If you do and you’re used to shooting with a more “ISOless” sensor ie the Sony sensors, you’ll notice it and it cause you extra work. You need to shoot the D7100 more like a film camera or most Canon bodies.

Hi Nasim, I am an amateur photographer mainly doing Portrait & Landscape. I have a Nikon DX body, D5100 to be precise. I have been honing my skills on same for now almost 2 years. I am comfortable with it. But of lately feel that as my photography improves I need more color depth and richness in my shots. I was initially thinking of Full Frame but as rightly pointed by Spencer Cox for my choice of work DX 7X series will work. If I don’t have budget constraints but still want the best value for my buck which should I go with. Thanks.

I too would like some opinions from current owners. I recently lost my d5200 to theft. unfortunately I only got to spend 18 months with it but i feel like I still had a lot to learn about it since the first six months i was shooting in auto. Anyway I’m ready for a new camera since i don’t wanna wait for the police to hopefully find it. i know the chances are slim. looking through the nikon catalog i can see that the D7100 is $300 dollars cheaper than the D7200. that translates into another lens.

What would be a better choice for a camera that i plan to keep for say the next 5 years?

Hey guys. Great comments, keep them coming. From what I have read so far there are many professional and experienced photographers here therefore I would like to ask you if the D7100 would be a good camera to shoot cars around town, photoshoots etc? Thanks in advance.

I’m a happy D7100 user and as you said, there’s not a huge incentive to upgrade to a D7200 for me. The raw buffer increase and improved image processing tempting though. The bigger one for me would be the increase to 9 frames for bracketing – very useful for HDR (big improvement on the D7100 that only had 3 frames).

I’m a very happy D7100 user who upgraded from a D5100 I get all excited dreaming of upgrading to a D7200 or D750 but the jump is just too big since I am an amateur and make no money from photography. I shoot a ton of HDR and just found out about the 9 frames for bracketing of the D7200 but I shoot my D7100 with 5 Frames at +/- 2 EV…the 9 Frames on the D7200 are ONLY at 1/2 or 1/3 nothing else….WOW So I will probably stay put until I see major price drops on a D750 I must admit the gray market on the D750 now is very tempting. Also the buffer issue is very much better with 95ms SD cards installed.

Guys i have followed this page and have seen a lot of the comments, i did upgrade after using two Nikon D7100 bodies to a D7200 and trust me the very first picture i took was simply awesome, so i firmly believe that it was worth the upgrade and i am not waiting for a D7300 (but i do hope it comes out soon with 4K vdo at 60 fps and and a better fps ratio), but guys the faster focusing system, better low light capability, better buffer, better battery life, flat picture control, better time lapse option (999 vs 9999), wifi and nfc and above all no color banding issue for which the D7100 was notorious do make the D7200 a far better option for $250 difference. And i am just loving this new beast from Nikon.

So if you can do get a D7200 over the D7100, trust me you wont regret it.

Hi, The D7100 with the toshiba sensor was designed for detail. There are many examples on line showing the detail difference between the D7100 v D7200 up to 1600 ISO. The D7200 with the was especially designed with the Sony sensor to achieve high ISO capability with increased buffer performance. I have personally visited both factories of manufacture. Both models are still in production because serving different needs to the user, and very popular models. Yes I am a Pro Photographer and hold a D4s, D810, and my D7100 but have added the D7200 for birding in rough weather conditions instead of damaging the costly D4s.Excellent reviews and comments on this sight. I always back up my statements. this is a link to detail of the D7100.www.youtube.com/watch…9hSNNrNS7M

Hi, I work with animal rescue, primarily cats for adoption (still close ups; very fast action kitten shots) and ferals (many with low or poor lighting) and was considering a package from one of the bigger retail vendors that included both the short and long lenses. Aside from the cost, which I would prefer to avoid but if I am able to get the shots that I am looking for so be it, does this sound like a good camera for this type of photography?

Hi, now I am using nikon D5200. My photography subject is wild life (specially bird) and portrait. So, please suggest which dslr will be best for me. I am using D5200 for 2years. Now want to upgrade my gear.

Hi – I currently use a Fuji S 5 Pro (based on a Nikon D200 chassis) and am thinking of trading-in & upgrading to the D7200. I do mostly weddings & (journalistic style) special events; also some bird/wildlife & a few portraits of family. Would you recommend the D7200, or another recent Nikon body?

I have a D70 and I am looking to upgrade thinking about the d7100 or d7200. I live in AK and take a lot of aurora pictures, so I need a relatively high ISO. I read somewhere that there was a problem shooting RAW with the d7200 and using adobe photoshop. Anyone have any insight into that?

Hi, I am using D3200 for more than 3years now and for recent days I am getting bored of the images and I tend to see the noise in the image. Even at Iso800 I can see the noise. For birding I rented sigma 150-500 once and I was completely disappointed with the results as it was too noisy. This could be because of the iso used 1600? I have sigma 17–50 f2.8 lens, nikon 55-200 VR and 50 f1.8g nikkor. I am right now thinking about upgrading my camera to D7200 or D7100 as I see much better results in those cams. Have any advice?

Hi ..Too much confuse about between D7100 and D7200…Please solve my Problem I’m going to buy on December for Christmas..and Please recommend me some best lens for them…would be best help for me…thank you..

I am a hobbyist and stepping up from the D3200. I love photographing birds. I am curious if it’s worth upgrading to the 7200 or saving money and purchasing the 7100 with a bundle? (18-140mm and 55-300mm). I hope to make a larger purchase next year with an upgraded telephoto lens as I improve my skills. I am slightly a perfectionist and want to achieve great detail of birds, but I also don’t want to break the bank if I’m not going to know the difference. Any recommendations?

Hi you can never go wrong with a d7200 its the best and 18-140 G lens is a great all around lens, find a good deal on a used lens to save money. It would be great if you can find a good deal on a used 18-300mm G lens but will be little heavy to carry around

Obviously, D7200 is much better than D7100 if you take photo of birds, wild life, sports because D7200 has much larger buffer than D7100. and very good at high iso with faster AF than D7100. If you are tight in budget then D7200 + Nikkor AFS 70-300mm will be the best combination for bird photography. If you can afford, then you can buy better and larger zoom lens like 150-600 mm or 400mm

The Nikon D7200 is an APS-C format camera. For bird photography, the better Nikon mount lenses start @ 400mm & go up. Try to get one with Vibration Reduction [VR]. Consider Sigma or Tamron Nikon mount lenses too, with as wide an apeture as you can afford. And see www.glennbartley.com/natur…s/gear.htm for more insight.

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.

Footer

Site Menu

Privacy & Cookies: Our partners will collect data and use cookies for ad personalization and measurement. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use. To find out more, including how to control cookies, please see our Privacy Policy